16:00:18 #startmeeting kolla 16:00:22 Meeting started Wed Jul 27 16:00:18 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is sdake. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:23 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:00:26 The meeting name has been set to 'kolla' 16:00:30 #topic rollcall 16:00:34 o/ 16:00:35 hi all :) 16:00:35 o/ 16:00:37 o/ 16:00:43 o/ 16:00:48 hi 16:01:01 o/ 16:01:34 o/ 16:02:10 notice some fresh faces - welcome duonghq hrito srwilkers_ 16:02:11 o/ 16:02:16 o/ 16:02:22 thanks :D 16:02:25 nice to see you 16:02:50 #topic announcements 16:03:07 Heidi was kind enough to make a video of the mascot selection process 16:03:37 https://zoom.us/recording/play/Adnpi67_uwd1qw3GZsD_CTvXj0hjSPQd48dHRxvCR9IWKzyT-bjFnIW7BtZYZUKo 16:04:11 when someone has finished the video let me know pls :) 16:04:44 we won :) 16:05:07 spoiler 16:05:12 Sorry, i'm late chaps. 16:05:21 yay 16:05:31 so no more honey badger? 16:05:37 inc0 the bloodshot koalla bear with glue involved is off the table :) 16:05:51 so I was thinking 16:06:07 koala bear gluing openstack squarey logos witha glue 16:06:09 no sniffing 16:06:19 thats the only announcement i have - anyone from community have anything? 16:06:37 kolla bear is what i always think of... but to bring inc0's idea in, it should be sniffing glue 16:06:57 :D 16:07:05 +1 16:07:14 it is a junky animal anyway 16:07:39 fwiw we dont have input into the mascot creation process 16:07:40 anyway, let's call it our secret mascot 16:07:47 duh 16:07:49 Drop bears. 16:07:55 ;) 16:08:11 honey badger 16:08:16 narwhal 16:08:19 #topic newton-3 16:08:32 A drop bear sniffing glue is all things to all people. At least all of the people who count. 16:08:51 #link https://launchpad.net/kolla/+milestone/newton-3 16:09:14 we have a whole lot of stuff planned for milestone 3 16:09:39 it seems unreasonable to think we will finish all of that work 16:10:04 milestone 3 will be a feature freeze 16:10:17 versus past releases where we put features in the rcs 16:10:25 we wont be doing that at all this cycle 16:10:27 yes we have many bugs which are either not updated or not valid anymore 16:10:33 because we applied for stable:follows-policy 16:11:15 coolsvap at this point i'm more concerned about the features landing in m3 then fixing bugs 16:11:18 and i think 10+ bugs targeted as a result of docimpact 16:11:36 sdake: agree 16:11:49 the problem with that view is people look at it, go "too much" and feel overwhelemd and don't know where to start 16:12:10 in past cycles 2 weeks before milestone 3, we cut all the features that were not in good progress or better 16:12:17 (liberty/newton) 16:12:25 liberty/mitaka I mean 16:12:32 i htink we should stick to that 16:12:49 any objections? 16:13:42 ok well i dont see any alternative anyway so objections probably8 don't matter :) 16:14:19 anyone willing to tackle some of the bug triage? 16:14:40 I am 16:15:02 cool 16:15:05 yo udont have to do it all 16:15:12 but any way you can help is appreciated 16:15:31 :) 16:15:44 #topic customization of dockerfiles 16:15:57 inc0 did you add this to the agenda? 16:16:04 that's old agenda 16:16:11 no its definately new 16:16:12 but, patchsets are there 16:16:19 ya lets discuss that 16:16:31 I'll review them all today 16:16:40 about half the customization patches are in the queue 16:16:54 also I'll work on customization of base, it's by far hardest 16:17:03 i'd like an ack from inc0 on each of em if he can commit to that 16:17:28 inc0 is that possible or too much? 16:17:37 possible, will do 16:17:40 cool 16:17:47 I just want to make sure they are precisely correct 16:17:57 since if we break this now, it not super ideal :) 16:18:25 #topic repo split 16:18:42 ryan's vote expired today without consensus 16:18:51 that siad, I think we should try voting again on this point 16:18:56 maybe the core team was AFK 16:19:03 its summer time 16:19:08 lots of PTO and whatnot 16:19:29 rhallisey you mind shooting out a new voting email in 1-2 weeks? 16:19:34 ya will do 16:19:55 probably right now is not the right time 16:19:56 just keep an eye out for that everyone 16:19:58 because we are still testing the backportss review policy 16:20:03 roger 16:20:14 i think the backports review policy seems to be working 16:20:15 I am not still not sure about my views about it 16:20:37 coolsvap I htink that will factor into everyone's voting 16:20:39 but lets revisit it in couple of weeks 16:21:27 #topic kolla-kubernetes 16:21:29 ya we can debate further on the ML 16:21:44 rhallisey have an update for us? 16:22:02 so still blocked on the api_interface patches 16:22:15 that was my fault right 16:22:26 I mean you raised a good point 16:22:39 but I don't think we should fully address the config issue now 16:22:50 because of the repo split/config split 16:22:55 can you commit to the following 16:22:59 I think we need to accept that we're looking for the "right now, so that Kolla-kubernetes doesn't have a giant pile of carried patches" solution. 16:23:05 Instead of the "end" solution. 16:23:06 ^ yes 16:23:12 that's my point 16:23:18 The reviews have been fixating on the end solution. 16:23:25 "I wont add any new variables to globals.yml after this variable"? 16:23:38 rhallisey see above question can yo ucommit ^^ 16:23:47 before the config split, it's unlikely 16:24:01 no i mean before milestone3 16:24:10 before m3 no 16:24:20 So, if you look at my Nova patch, you'll see all of the variables we're altering and adding to get things going. 16:24:25 ok well i'll change my vote to unblock things 16:24:42 wirehead_ the issue is putting things in globals.yml is permanentn 16:24:56 wirehead_ because of how openstack deprecation policies work 16:25:13 if we do rework on globls.yml its a huge pita 16:25:25 that was the basis of my complaint on ryan's patch 16:25:25 i haven't seen your nova patch 16:26:09 here we are making a semi-permanent compromise to unblock your work 16:26:16 that we can possibly undo later 16:26:33 but if 5 variables needed in globals.yml - thats a whole nother world of pain :) 16:27:07 Well, the way that we're progressing forwards right now is that Kolla-kubernetes requires you to add stuff to globals.yml. 16:27:07 wirehead_ mind linking your review for after meeting to see what the issue is 16:27:41 We're OK with kolla-kubernetes users needing to paste some lines into globals.yml and Kolla users having an unmodified globals.yml file? 16:27:42 wirehead_ ok i get that part - but ryan's addition was a nonessential variable 16:28:03 wirehead_ ya actually thats a fantastic solution 16:28:31 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/347572/ 16:28:36 kolla-kubernetes is on a release:cycle_independent model 16:28:56 sdake, if that's the case we can remove the global var 16:29:06 but the j2 login underneath will need to stay 16:29:14 which means if we dont polute the globals.yml namespace, no harm is done to kolla-ansible 16:29:25 Yeah. 16:29:28 We can do that for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/327925/ 16:29:30 j2 login 16:29:38 j2 logic 16:29:49 i'll have a look after meeting 16:29:50 logic 16:30:08 thanks wirehead for solving that problem :) 16:30:47 Oh, and Nova's control plane is starting to work as a Kube service. :) 16:30:55 wirehead_ anything that I can do to help communicate that idea? 16:31:06 nice :) 16:31:17 wirehead_, nice 16:31:28 sdake: Might be worth it to just post an official summary of what needs to change with that patch for it to get +2'd 16:31:55 wirehead_ that would be atypical, but I think an email explaining how we are relaxing reviews aroudn kolla-kubernetes 16:32:10 because of this change to documenting globals.yml 16:32:29 i'd find that helpful for the core team 16:32:57 your complaint was that everyone is looking at the end solution 16:33:09 which is valid :) 16:33:52 ok well then anything else on kolla-kubernetes? 16:33:59 nothing atm 16:34:05 thanks 16:34:28 rhallisey would you mind sending out a email explaining the review approach because of globals.yml cut and paste? 16:34:43 ok 16:35:19 might help to point people at the irc log of the meeting index on the technical details 16:35:34 #topic open discussion 16:35:58 so, we don't have any input to mascot creation? 16:36:01 really? 16:36:17 inc0 I am not really sure 16:36:23 pip installs in binary containers 16:36:35 inc0 up first then coolsvap has floor 16:37:03 sdake, can you ask? 16:37:05 inc0 I can find out if you like what hte process will be 16:37:07 we have grand plans;) 16:37:49 inc0 it may be hiding on the mailing lsit somewhre 16:37:57 inc0 give me a couple hours 16:38:06 coolsvap ure up 16:38:12 #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-July/100024.html 16:38:42 i wanted to bring it in meeting 16:39:35 inputs are most appreciated 16:39:36 coolsvap mind bringing people up to speed on the status of the thread 16:40:05 so there is a request to do pip install in networking-sfc container review 16:40:30 which I think we have not allowed till now 16:40:57 i am pretty sure we have allowed source only containers 16:41:14 murano as an example 16:41:31 how is this one different from that? 16:41:48 i am fine with source only containers 16:41:53 please have a look at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/344930/ 16:42:17 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/344930/6/docker/neutron/neutron-networking-sfc-agent/Dockerfile.j2 16:42:20 oh its updated 16:42:35 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/344930/1/docker/neutron/neutron-networking-sfc-agent/Dockerfile.j2 16:42:37 patch set 1 16:43:30 do we allow pip install networking-sfc in binary containers 16:43:38 coolsvap its hard to review in meeting time - but I htink what woudl help is what are peoples positions 16:43:43 where is the problem taht needs fixing 16:44:41 thats my question 16:44:56 i see :) 16:45:01 i am fine if its discussed outside meeting or mailing list 16:45:28 coolsvap i'll ask the core team to have a look at that thread 16:45:55 so we can make a determination 16:46:08 my general position is pip and yum should not be mixed unless absolutely necessary 16:46:35 anyone else have anythign to add? 16:47:25 any other open items? 16:47:31 I think we have had situations where packages were not present in distos where we had source only containers 16:47:46 coolsvap yup that is correct 16:48:35 murano was not in rdo at one point (maybe still) and the binary container didn't build but source did from upstream 16:49:12 ok well thanks for coming folks 16:49:25 #endmeeting